Jtc Chai

Global Rights, Human Rights, Open Letters

Calls for Accountability Grow as HRD Quianna Canada Condemns Shooting of Trans Organizer, Banko Brown

May 12, 2023 by Jtc Chai 0 Comments Banko Brown, homeless, Jordan Neely

Calls for Accountability Grow as HRD Quianna Canada Condemns Shooting of Trans Organizer, Banko Brown

To Honorable Olivier De Schutter and the Esteemed Members of the Human Rights Committee,

I am writing to urge you to conduct a thorough investigation into the murder of Banko Brown, an American trans organizer, whose life was taken by a security guard on April 27, 2023. The tragic event has left not only his loved ones, but also the entire LGBTQ community he was fighting for, devastated and fearful for their safety.

The Walgreens security guard stopped Brown for shoplifting, and afterwards, a confrontation ensued. During the confrontation, the security guard fatally shot Brown. Several US security guards have gunned down shoplifters in the US, raising the question as to whether shoplifting is now punishable by death in the nation.

Article 6 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights prohibits arbitrary deprivation of life. It also provides for specific conditions for the imposition of the death penalty with respect to countries that have not yet abolished it. Although the US ratified the Covenant on June 08, 1992, individual citizens cannot bring a complaint under the protocol.

The Human Rights Committee has articulated that countries such as the US—that have not abolished the death penalty—only may impose the death penalty for the most serious crimes. This means the US must interpret the term “most serious crimes” restrictively and should appertain only to crimes of extreme gravity, involving intentional killing. Evidence indicates that Brown was unarmed. Crimes not resulting directly and intentionally in death, such as economic crimes, can never serve as the basis for the imposition of the death penalty under Article 6.

Calls for Accountability Grow as HRD Quianna Canada Condemns Shooting of Trans Organizer, Banko Brown and Strangulation of Jordan Neely

The murder of Brown is not just a crime against an individual, but an attack on the fundamental principles of democracy and the rule of law. As with Jordan Neely, Brown could not fully enjoy his rights, such as the right to food, because he could not afford to buy adequate food. I would even go so far as to say that Brown was also unable to obtain food because of the persistent patterns of discrimination in political and social participation in the US.

How the U.S. Government Failed Brown:

Right to Adequate Housing: the US Government has not fulfilled its obligation to protect homeless persons nationwide. As per the UN, States should regulate the housing and rental markets in a way that promotes and protects the right to adequate housing.

Right to Adequate Food: Food was not available, accessible or adequate for Brown. While there is no right to be fed by the Government, Brown does have a right to feed himself in dignity (Right to Adequate Food, p. 3). Whenever individuals or groups are unable, for reasons beyond their control, to enjoy the right to food by the means at their disposal, the US has the obligation to provide. An example provided by the UN is providing food assistance or ensuring social safety nets for the most deprived.

Links between Brown’s Human Right to Food and Other human rights:

The right to life. When people are not able to feed themselves, they face the risk of death by starvation, malnutrition or resulting illnesses.

The murder of Brown and Neely sends a chilling message to other houseless individuals that their lives are at risk. Indeed, the murder of impoverished persons is a broader problem with vigilante justice in the US. It may indicate a lack of respect for human rights, embolden a culture of impunity for those who commit crimes against homeless persons, or may indicate state-sanctioned violence.

As the world’s leading intergovernmental organization promoting peace, justice, and human rights, the UN has a responsibility to investigate such cases and hold those responsible accountable. The UN must send a strong message that the murder of homeless persons will not be tolerated and that those responsible must face justice.

I therefore call on the UN to conduct a thorough and impartial investigation into the murder Brown and Neely, and to seek information as to why the perpetrators are not being brought to justice. It is critical that the UN take action to prevent further attacks on homeless persons in the US, and to uphold the values of democracy, freedom, and justice that are at the core of its mission.

Sincerely,

Journey to the Center

Analysis

How the In-group Uses Human Rights Defenders as Scapegoats

Apr 21, 2023 by Jtc Chai 0 Comments human rights defenders, in-group, out-group

How the In-group Uses Human Rights Defenders as Scapegoats

In recent years, it has become increasingly common for the in-group to use human rights defenders as scapegoats.

How the In-group Uses Human Rights Defenders as Scapegoats. Who Is More Susceptible?

This tactic is especially insidious in environments where people are less educated, such as refugee and asylum seeker populations, because it causes people to turn on each other instead of focusing on the real problems at hand, such as a housing crisis, the lack of adequate gun-control policies or inadequate legislation that fails to hold all law enforcement officers accountable for their actions. The in-group uses this technique to distract populations from their own shortcomings and to avoid taking responsibility for their actions.

For example, the in-group may blame strife in a refugee camp on the human rights defender, rather than admitting their plan to enlist the cooperation of asylum seekers to help them repatriate a human rights defender contributed to the problem. This not only distracts from the real issues at hand, but it also demonises a vulnerable group of people who are often already marginalised and discriminated against.

Another example is when the in-group uses their positional power to portray human rights defenders as threatening and untrustworthy. Not only does this harm the human rights defender, it also makes them prone to more violence, harassment and discrimination, all in the name of protecting the interests of the group.

So, what can you do to combat this tactic?

The first step you can do is to recognise when it is happening. You need to be vigilant and critical of the messages you receive from the in-group, even if they offer you an attractive incentive for your participation in harming human rights defenders in your environment. You should also ask yourself who is really responsible for the problem presented before you. Often it is within the in-group, in light of the fact that the out-group often lacks power and does not have the rank required to make societal changes.

You should also resist the temptation to turn on one another. Instead, you should question both sides and ask: what are the goals of each party? This allows you to elaborate on all the information and to see what puzzle pieces are missing.

In conclusion, when the in-group uses human rights defenders as scapegoats, it is a dangerous and destructive tactic that undermines our social fabric and distracts us from the real concerns at issue. You must be critical and vigilant in order to combat this tactic, and to build a more just and equitable society for all.

Analysis

Why Governments Work to Discredit Country Condition Researchers

Mar 29, 2023 by Jtc Chai 0 Comments country conditions researchers, Governments, human rights, researcher

Why Governments Work to Discredit Country Condition Researchers.

Governments work to discredit Country Condition Researchers because researchers play an essential role in informing the international community about human rights and political conditions within countries.

First, Governments will work to undermine the researchers and their findings by claiming their research is biased, inaccurate or politicized. Second, Governments will work to rescind a Country Conditions Researcher’s findings by bribing groups who were previously studied. For example, a Government may ask the studied group to conduct themselves differently or to intentionally undermine the researcher’s findings. If they agree to cooperate, the Government may offer them an incentive.

The Government has tremendous influence on independent research. For instance, the Government can persuade those in the scholarly community not to publish findings that contradicts their propaganda. The Government can also persuade the scholarly community to reject the findings of the researcher. This makes it appear as if the researcher is inexperienced or ill-informed.

It cannot be denied that Country Conditions Researchers often expose human rights abuses, corruption, and social injustices within countries. These findings can be damaging to the government’s image and reputation, both nationally and internationally. As a result, Governments will work to protect their reputation and avoid any negative consequences—and that is by discrediting the researcher.

Researchers also expose issues that the Government wishes to conceal. We know that Governments seek to suppress or control the flow of information to maintain their power and control. Country Conditions Researchers work independently and objectively. Some Government will employ its own researchers to suppress the findings of independent researchers and to maintain their power.

We know that a researchers’ findings on human rights abuses, political repression, torture and social injustices can lead to international scrutiny and pressure for reforms. Therefore, Governments will work to undermine or prevent international scrutiny of their practices and policies. Even if the Governments’ policies violate human rights, the Government will work to discredit the researchers’ image to the public to justify its harmful policies to avoid or downplay this international pressure.

In conclusion, Governments work to discredit Country Condition Researchers to protect their reputation, suppress information, and avoid international scrutiny. However, these attempts to discredit researchers are often unjustified and serve to undermine the role if independent research in exposing human rights abuses and promoting transparency and accountability.

Direct Provision, Human Rights

Breaking the Silence: Shocking Treatment of Asylum Seekers in Ireland Demand Urgent Action from NGOs

Mar 25, 2023 by Jtc Chai 0 Comments human rights, Ireland, NGOs, torture

Breaking the Silence: Shocking Treatment of Asylum Seekers in Ireland Demand Urgent Action from NGOs

Non-governmental organizations (NGOs) are often at the forefront of advocating for asylum seekers, refugees, and the Traveller community in Ireland. Most have made significant strides in raising awareness about the mistreatment and injustices that occur in different parts of Ireland. However, there is an issue that has been largely ignored by many asylum advocate NGOs in Ireland, and that is the issue of torture in Direct Provision. Torture is a heinous crime that violates human rights and has devastating consequences for victims.

United Nations Definition of Torture

The United Nations defines torture as “any act by which severe pain or suffering, whether physical or mental, is intentionally inflicted on a person for such purposes as obtaining from him or a third person information or a confession, punishing him for an act he or a third person has committed or is suspected of having committed, or intimidating or coercing him or a third person”. Torture is a violation of human rights and a crime under international law. It is a cruel and inhumane practice that has no place in Ireland or any society.

NGOs Must Break Their Silence on the Torturous Practices Authority Officials are Using Against Asylum Seekers in Direct Provision

Despite the unequivocal condemnation of torture by UN Special Rapporteur on Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment, authority figures in Ireland continue to use these practices to intimidate certain asylum seekers. Torture is being used by Irish officials to extract information, punish individuals for seeking asylum, and to intimidate populations. It is used as a tool of repression to silence dissent and maintain power.

Breaking the Silence: Shocking Treatment of Asylum Seekers in Ireland Demand Urgent Action from NGOs: Consequences of Torture

The consequences of torture are severe and long-lasting. Victims of torture often suffer from physical and mental health problems, including post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), chronic pain, and serious ill-treatment. Many are left with permanent disabilities, and some even die as a result of their injuries.

NGOs Role in Ending Torture

NGOs in Ireland play a critical role in ending torture. For instance, NGOs have the expertise, resources, and networks to document cases of torture, provide legal assistance to victims, and advocate for changes in policy and practice. Further, NGOs can work with international bodies, such as the Committee Against Torture, to raise awareness about the use of torture and to pressure the Irish governments to take action to end this abhorrent practice.

NGOs Are Being Persuaded by Powerful Authority Figures Not to Act

Irish NGOs have been hesitant to break their silence on the torture that is occurring in Direct Provision because they are being persuaded by powerful authority figures not to act. Torture often occurs in secret, and sometimes, it is difficult to obtain evidence of its use. What is more, officials who are deploying torturous practices in Direct Provision are often repressive and unresponsive to criticism, making it difficult for asylum seekers to speak out and access their rights. Indeed, there is a history in Ireland of intimidating asylum seekers into silence over their poor treatment.

While NGOs may be concerned about the safety of their staff and the impact that speaking out against torture may have on their relationships with governments and other stakeholders in Ireland, one of the primary roles of NGOs is to foster a culture of accountability. In other words, NGOs in Ireland must hold government officials responsible for their actions.

Why Silence on Torture is Not an Option

NGOs must recognize that their silence on torture is not an option. NGOs have a moral obligation to speak out against all forms of human rights abuses, including torture. By remaining silent on torture in Ireland, NGOs are allowing this heinous practice to continue unchecked. Moreover, by failing to speak out against torture, NGOs are failing to fulfill their mandate to promote and protect human rights.

When NGOs speak out against torture, they expose torture and the International Community is more likely to take action to prevent future abuses. NGOs can demand Direct Provision centres follow international human rights standards, such as the Istanbul Protocol, which provides guidelines for the investigation and documentation of torture.

Breaking News

Coercive Repatriation: A Human Rights Crisis on the Rise in Ireland

Mar 23, 2023 by Jtc Chai 0 Comments Article 14, asylum seekers, coercive repatriation, human rights

Coercive Repatriation: A Human Rights Crisis on the Rise in Ireland

Coercive repatriation, sometimes referred to as forced repatriation, is the practice of forcibly returning individuals to their country of origin, usually against their will. It is a phenomenon that has been on the rise in recent years, and one that is increasingly being recognized as a human rights crisis with potentially devastating consequences.

According to Article 14 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, everyone has the right to seek and enjoy asylum from persecution in other countries. Some Americans seek asylum in other countries due to government persecution, police violence or other threats to their safety and well-being. However, Ireland is using more aggressive tactics to try to repatriate Americans who seek asylum on their soil, regardless of the risks and dangers they may face upon their return to the United States.

The practice of coercive repatriation is a clear violation of international human rights law. Ireland is a signatory of the 1951 Refugee Convention, which prohibits it from forcing asylum seekers to return to their country of origin when they would face persecution or other serious threats to their life, freedom, or well-being. Further, under international law, all persons— including Americans—have the right to seek asylum and protection from persecution.

Despite these legal frameworks, Ireland is engaging in coercive repatriation or other practices that make it difficult or impossible for American asylum seekers to access their rights. This includes tactics like pitting asylum seekers, NGOs and other community members against them, all of which can leave American asylum seekers effectively stranded and at risk of harm.

The consequences of coercive repatriation can be dire. For instance, many Americans who are repatriated in this way face arrest, detention, torture, or even death upon their return, particularly where they have been previously attacked for their race, political opinions or other characteristics.

Additionally, the trauma and psychological harm that can result from being forcibly removed from one’s new home and returned to a situation of danger and uncertainty can have long-lasting effects on their well-being.

Despite the clear legal and moral imperatives to protect all asylum seekers from harm, the rising trend of coercive repatriation illustrates how far Ireland is from meeting its obligations under international law.

Advocates and policymakers around the world must work together to ensure that the rights of all asylum seekers are upheld and that they have access to timely and effective protection from persecution and other serious threats to their safety.

In conclusion, coercive repatriation is a deeply concerning phenomenon that poses a clear threat to the rights and safety of American asylum seekers. It is a problem that demands immediate attention from the international community, and one that must be addressed with urgency and compassion.

Coercive Repatriation: A Human Rights Crisis on the Rise in Ireland – If you know someone that is being coercively repatriated, please contact us.